Author
Topic: The Next Zeiss Lenses? [CR2] (Read 15342 times)

I’ve been told by a good source what Zeiss has planned for the coming year or so as far as new prime lenses.

There will be a 28 f/1.4 introduced and an update to the Planar 85 f/1.4 (probably the weakest lens in the lineup). Don’t expect both lenses to be announced at the same time, and there could be a big gap between them. These are going to be on par with the new Distagon 55mm f/1.4 that was announced at Photokina.

What is the difference between Planar and Distagon? I have seen these names often but don't know if there is significance to the names

Thanks

I did a search and found:

Planar

Designed by Dr. Paul Rudolph in 1896 based on the double Gauss design (in 1817, C F Gauss described a telescope objective consisting of a pair of meniscus shaped elements, one positive, and one negative.) The design was 4 groups of 6 elements, and a flat field design. Symmetrical optical configuration producing low spherical aberration and astigmatism. The normal wide airspace separating the positive and negative elements in the double gauss design made a large amount of spherical aberration. Rudolph thickened the negative elements and reduced the airspace as much as possible, which corrected the spherical aberration and the sagittal/ tangential astigmatic aberration. Rudolph also inserted a "buried surface" into the thick negative elements of a cemented interface separating two type of glass having the same refractive index, but different dispersive powers. Not widely used until coating processes were available, due to light loss from the large number of transmission surfaces causing very low contrast. Due to it's complexity and high number of transmission surfaces, it really did not come into it's own until coating was developed. The planar was used as a base for lens derivatives, though in asymmetric form. Almost all the high-aperture lenses supplied on Japanese cameras are modification on the Planar..

Distagon

This is a reversed telephoto lens, consisting of a large negative lens in front of an ordinary lens. This allows it to obtain a short overall focal length with elements of a larger and more manageable size, helps design a system that is favorable for both high relative aperture and wild-angular field, and increased the back focal distance beyond it's usual magnitude, which give space for the mirror of a SLR. The downsides are that is must be physically large, and of complex construction to correct all the aberrations, making the lens more expensive to produce. Reversed telephoto designs are rarely over 2 inches in focal length, and then it is only used for specific applications. Compared to the Biogon, it has a larger circle of illumination full aperture, though softer when wide open, though it is sharper when stopped down. Rear element does not interfere with mirrors in SLR's

Interesting comment in the film clip which implies they need to improve the Zeiss standard to cope with new sensors - like the D800 I think he mentions. A lot of people might possibly think Zeiss had some of the best lenses around already especially if you forgive the lack of AF. Hmmm. Can't be a throw away comment as I see it. And if Zeiss think this perhaps Canon and Nikon think the same. I think other threads have latched onto this in terms of speculating the Canon mega pixel camera will be held back until all the lenses are in place. Can't believe Zeiss are making a 3000 euro 50 mm lens MF unless they see more than the D800 in sight. Do people who know more about this sort of thing than me have any views?